September 2001
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Sport Fish and Wildlife
Restoration
Program Update September 2001
cover photo: Photodisc
i
Table of
Contents
September 2001
Assistant Director Comments ii
Staff Directory, Federal Aid, Washington Office iv
Federal Aid Grant Programs - Overview 1
Focus on Specific Programs and Activities 3
DCAA Audit 3
Federal Aid Information Systems 4
National Survey of Fishing, Hunting, and Wildlife Associated Recreation 5
Wildlife and Sport Fish Restoration Programs Improvement Act of 2000 6
Multistate Conservation Grant Program 7
National Coastal Wetlands Conservation Grant Program 9
Aquatic Resource Education Program 10
Hunter Education Section 10 11
Appendices 13
Photodisc
ii September 2001
Assistant
Director
Comments
This was an extremely busy year for
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s
(Service) Federal Aid employees. They
worked hard to bring the programs
they administer into full compliance
with the Wildlife and Sport Fish
Restoration Programs Improvement
Act of 2000. They were simultaneously
dealing with significant issues
concerning the future conduct of the
Federal Aid Audit Program.
A report detailing our efforts to
institute measures required in the
Improvement Act was submitted to
Congress and will be available to the
public on the Service’s Federal Aid
web site (www.fs.r9.fws.gov). Report
highlights include: start-up of the $6
million Multistate Conservation Grant
Program with 14 projects funded;
establishment of procedures to
administer the new Firearm and Bow
Hunter Education Safety Program
Grants to fund hunter education and
shooting range construction;
implementation of procedures to meet
the 12 allowable categories of
administrative expenses required by
the Improvement Act; reduction of
administrative budgets for the
programs from $32 million in Fiscal
Year 2000 to $18 million in Fiscal Year
2001; and apportionment of $5.5
million in administrative cost savings
to the states.
To meet the administrative cost
reductions required by the
Improvement Act, the Service will
reduce the number of Federal Aid
employees nationwide from 147 in
Fiscal Year 2000 to 104 in Fiscal Year
2003. This reduced staffing level
presents one of the larger challenges
we face as we move forward.
The Improvement Act eliminated
funding for the Fish and Wildlife
Reference Service and the
Management Assistance Team, two
Federal Aid activities that were
popular with the states. Fortunately,
with help from the International
Association of Fish and Wildlife
Agencies (IAFWA), we were able to
use the Multistate Conservation Grant
Program to enable these services to
continue. We are also using Multistate
Conservation Grant funding for the
first time to pay for the 2001 National
Survey of Fishing, Hunting, and
Wildlife Associated Recreation. This
will be the 10th survey since 1955 and
has become the Nation’s most
important source of information on
wildlife-related recreation,
participation, and economic benefits.
You can expect publication of the
National report by November, 2002,
with the state reports to follow in
December.
Two important new programs,
the Boating Infrastructure Grant
(BIG) Program and the Wildlife
Conservation Restoration Program
(WCRP) also got underway this year.
The Service announced the availability
of $16 million in BIG Program grants
for this fiscal year and announced the
first cycle of projects to be funded.
Working in close cooperation with the
IAFWA and several states, we
launched the $50 million WCRP. As
part of this effort, I am pleased to
report we have approved WCRP
comprehensive plans for all 50 states
and the 6 territories and that many
states already have initiated projects.
Finally, following a thorough review of
the Defense Audit Contract Agency
(DCAA) state audits, the Service
decided to terminate its Memorandum
of Understanding with DCAA. We are
working closely with DCAA, our Office
of Inspector General, and other
Interior Department offices to ensure
that this termination will not interfere
unduly in the audit process. We will
work closely with the states to
complete open audits in a timely
manner and ensure that states have
full involvement in completing the
audit process.
September 2001 iii
The coming years will be challenging
ones for the Service’s Federal Aid
programs. With reduced staff levels
we will have to adapt to Congressional
mandates, implement new grant
programs, administer existing grant
programs, and maintain a strong
relationship with our state partners.
Nonetheless, based on what we have
accomplished in 2001, I am confident
that our well trained, dedicated
professional staff is up to the
challenge. While we move forward to
improve management of what is
arguably the Nation’s most effective
conservation program, I predict we
will see a notable improvement in the
delivery of services to you, our
customers.
USFWS
iv September 2001
Kris E. LaMontagne
Division Chief
* Larry Bandolin
Deputy Division Chief - Operations
Jimmye Kane
Secretary
Branch of Budget and
Administration
Tom Jeffrey
Branch Chief - Budget
Development and Execution -
Program Management - Special
Projects
Mary Jones
Administrative Officer
Branch of FAIMS and ADP Support
Bill Conlin
Branch Chief - Information Resources
and ADP Management - ADP Support
- Federal Aid Information
Management System (FAIMS)
Jeffrey Graves
Server Support - Web Site Support
David Washington
ADP Systems Support - ADP
Acquisition Support
Branch of Grants Operations and
Policy
Gary Reinitz
Branch Chief - Policy - National Issue
Management
Jack Hicks
Regulation - FWS Manual -
Hunter/Aquatic Education
* Michael Vanderford
CVA - BIG - National Coastal
Wetlands Conservation Grants-
Wildlife Restoration Program -
Partnerships for Wildlife Program
* Tim Hess
WCRP - Sport Fish Restoration
Program
* Chris McKay
(Internal Partner with RBFF)
Multistate Conservation Grant
Program
Branch of Audits and Cash
Management
Lanny Moore
Branch Chief - Audits - Cash
Management
* Ord Bargerstock
Systems Accountant - Regions 4 & 5 -
Audit Resolution
* Pat McHugh
Systems Accountant - Regions 3, 6, &
7 - Audit Program Oversight
* Kate Gilliam
Systems Accountant - Regions 1 & 2 -
Lessons Learned - Future Audit Plans
Branch of Surveys
Sylvia Cabrera
Branch Chief - National Survey of
Fishing Hunting and Wildlife
Associated Recreation
Richard Aiken
Economist - National Survey
Genevieve Pullis
Economist - National Survey
Branch of Training
Steve Leggans
Branch Chief
Blake Weirich
Assistant Training Coordinator
Left the WO
Bill Gruber
Accountant, Retired
Steve Farrell
transferred to WO Refuges
Pete Peterson
transferred to DOI
Michelle Morman
transferred to WO Refuges
Staff Directory
Federal Aid
Washington
Office
* New in this position.
Division of Federal Aid
Washington Office
4401 N. Fairfax Drice
Suite 140
Arlington, VA 22203
Main: 703/358 2156
Fax: 703/358 1837
Internet home page:
http://fa.r9.fws.gov
September 2001 1
Federal Aid
Grant Programs
Overview The goal of the Federal Aid Program
is to strengthen the ability of state and
territorial fish and wildlife agencies to
meet effectively the consumptive and
non-consumptive needs of the public
for fish and wildlife resources. The
Federal Aid Program is responsible
for administering the following
programs:
■ Wildlife Restoration
■ Sport Fish Restoration
■ Clean Vessel Pumpout
■ Boating Infrastructure Grant
■ National Coastal Wetlands
Conservation Grant
■ Partnerships for Wildlife Grant
■ Wildlife Conservation and
Restoration
■ Multistate Conservation Grant
The Federal Aid in Wildlife
Restoration Act was approved by
Congress on September 2, 1937, and
began functioning on July 1, 1938. The
purpose of this Act is to provide
funding for the selection, restoration,
rehabilitation and improvement of
wildlife habitat, wildlife management
research and the distribution of
information produced by the projects.
Congress amended the Act October
23, 1970, to include funding for hunter
training programs and the
development, operation and
maintenance of public target ranges.
Funds are derived from an 11 percent
Federal excise tax on sporting arms,
ammunition, and archery equipment,
and a 10 percent tax on handguns.
Additional funds are also collected
from a 12.4 percent tax on archery
equipment. These funds are
apportioned each year to the states
and territories (except Puerto Rico) by
the Department of the Interior on the
basis of formulas set forth in the Act.
The Federal Aid in Sport Fish
Restoration Act, commonly referred to
as the Dingell-Johnson Act was passed
on August 9, 1950. It was modeled
after the Federal Aid in Wildlife
Restoration Act to create a parallel
program for fish management,
conservation, and restoration. The
Program is funded by a 10 percent
Federal excise tax on fishing rods,
reels, creels, lures, flies and artificial
baits and a 3 percent tax on electronic
fishing motors and sonar fish finders.
These funds are also apportioned each
year to the states and territories
(except Puerto Rico) by the
Department of the Interior on the
basis of a formula set forth in the Act.
The Clean Vessel Act was passed in
1992 to help reduce pollution from
vessel sewage discharges. The Act
established a Federal grant program
to the states to be administered by the
Service and funded by the Sport Fish
Restoration Account of the Aquatic
Resource’s Trust Fund. Federal funds
can cover up to 75 percent of all
approved project costs with the
remaining funds provided by the
states or marinas. Grants are available
to the states on a competitive basis for
the construction and/or renovation,
operation, and maintenance of
pumpout and portable toilet dump
stations. After states submit grant
proposals to the Service for review, the
Service’s Division of Federal Aid then
convenes a panel including
representatives from the Divisions’
Washington Office, the National
Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration, the Environmental
Protection Agency, and the U.S. Coast
Guard to rank proposals. Awards are
made shortly afterward.
The Boating Infrastructure Grant
(BIG) Program provides $32 million
over four years (2000- 2003) for grants
to the states and territories, local
governments and private marinas. The
purpose of the grants is to encourage
states, in cooperation with local and
private interests, to install, renovate
and maintain tie-up facilities for
nontrailerable recreational boats.
2 September 2001
The Sport Fishing and Boating
Partnership Council annually
recommends grants for funding to the
Service.
The Coastal Wetlands Planning,
Protection and Restoration Act is
funded by 18 percent of the Sport Fish
Restoration Account or 100 percent of
the excise tax on small engine fuel
(whichever is greater). The program
provides 15 percent of the funds (not
to exceed $15 million) for the National
Coastal Wetlands Conservation Grant
Program. The Service provides
Coastal Wetlands Grants to states
and territories for coastal wetlands
acquisition, restoration and
enhancement. Congress reauthorized
The Coastal Wetlands Planning,
Protection and Restoration Act in
November, 2000, through Fiscal Year
2009.
The purpose of the Partnerships for
Wildlife Grant Program is to establish
partnerships among the Service,
states and territories, non-government
organizations and individuals. The
program is to support wildlife
conservation and appreciation
projects, encourage states and
territories to more fully use
public/private partnerships to carry
out wildlife conservation and
appreciation projects, and encourage
private donations and partnerships to
carry out wildlife conservation and
appreciation projects. The
Partnerships for Wildlife Grant
Program is designed to have 1/3
contributions each for a given project
from the Service, the sponsor state,
and a private party. For Fiscal Year
2001, $1,052,158 was made available to
grantees under this program.
The Wildlife Conservation and
Restoration Program was authorized
by Congress in 2000, and implemented
in Fiscal Year 2001. State and
territorial fish and wildlife agencies
are encouraged to participate with the
Federal Government, other state
agencies, wildlife conservation
organizations and outdoor recreation
and conservation interests through
cooperative planning and
implementation of the Wildlife
Conservation and Restoration
Program. Wildlife conservation,
wildlife conservation education, and
wildlife-associated recreation activities
are all eligible for funding. Public input
and participation is actively sought by
the states in conducting this program.
The program was funded with $50
million for Fiscal Year 2001 with the
funds being apportioned to the states
and territories by formula.
The new Multistate Conservation
Grant Program provides up to $6
million annually to projects that
benefit resources in unique and
innovative ways. The projects
recommended for funding to the
Secretary of Interior by the IAFWA
must benefit 26 states, a majority of
states in a Service Region, or a
regional association of state fish and
wildlife agencies. There were 14 grants
awarded in Fiscal Year 2001.
The above programs are designed to
help conserve, develop, and enhance
the Nation’s fish and wildlife
resources, and to protect their habitats
for the continuing benefit of the
American people.
September 2001 3
Focus on
Specific
Programs and
Activities
DCAA Audit The Service’s Division of Federal Aid
provided notice to the Defense
Contracting Audit Agency (DCAA) that
it is terminating the Memorandum of
Understanding under which DCAA
conducts state audits for Federal Aid.
The termination of the MOU with
DCAA while audits are still underway
raised some understandable questions
regarding the completion of current
and future audits. The disengagement
process is still in negotiation and some
details remain to be worked out. We are
working closely with DCAA, our Office
of Inspector General and others to
assure a smooth transition. We are
confident all issues will be resolved
satisfactorily and equitably.
Our clear intent is to give the states the
best service we can. We will continue to
work closely with Regional Offices and
the states to complete open audits in a
timely fashion. States will continue to
have the same opportunities for input
into completing the audit process.
Teams of auditors from Federal Aid
Washington and Regional Offices along
with state representatives and staff
from several Department of Interior
Offices will participate in completing
the current audit process.
In addition to ongoing efforts to
complete open audits, we are
undertaking actions to improve the
next cycle of audits. To this end, we are
conducting a “lessons learned analysis”
based on data gleaned from audit
findings and additional data gathered
from Regional Offices, and eventually,
the states. From the “lessons learned
analysis” we will have the information
necessary to write a revised audit
scope of work and provide a more
consistent and standardized application
of the audit program. The addition of
two auditors in the Washington Office
will enable the Service to provide more
oversight during the next state audit
process. The Washington auditors will
participate in the entrance conference,
field work, review of working papers,
and provide input to the content of
draft reports. With your assistance we
believe we can improve the process for
conducting future audits.
Working through our Regional Offices,
we will keep our state partners
informed of developments regarding
the evolution of the audit process.
Photodisc
4 September 2001
The FAIMS team added two modules
to FAIMS. The Lands Component
allows the user to record greater detail
in grant accomplishment records
including information about the type of
interest acquired. Regional files of
scanned documents (maps and legal
descriptions) associated with the
acquisition are but two examples of
records that can be added. The Alerts
Component allows individual
notification of Federal Aid staff about a
variety of processing actions needed.
These range from performance
reports received for which
accomplishment records have yet to be
created, to the pending expiration of
Grant Agreements or Applications for
Federal Assistance. These alerts
provide an immediate link to the
appropriate records facilitating timely
resolution of each potential issue.
Another time saving feature of FAIMS
that improves Regional Office
efficiency is the integration of a letter
generation capability with
WordPerfect. This allows each
Regional Office to format letters
informing grantees about the outcome
of proposal and grant reviews with
reference to grant records supporting
the approval decision.
FAIMS was modified to accept entries
for eight new grant programs. The
programs are; Habitat Conservation
Plan (HCP) Land Acquisition,
Candidate Conservation Agreement,
HCP Planning Grants, Safe Harbor,
Species Recovery Land Acquisition,
HCP Land Acquisition Grants to
States (all endangered species
related), Boating Infrastructure Grant,
Section 10 Hunter Education, and
Wildlife Conservation and Restoration.
Instructions about how to set up new
grant programs at both the regional
and national level were added to the
on-line help system. The
apportionment calculations, previously
a stand alone program, was added to
FAIMS and the sub-program
accounting codes long used by Federal
Aid were aligned to match those codes
used by the Service’s Federal
Financial System (FFS), thus
improving system synchronization.
Finally, two new reports were created.
A state report that summarizes
awarded grants by Region, state,
program, and Fiscal Year replaces the
former Federal Aid Annual Report
that often was long delayed in
production. A Federal Aid Accrual
Report predicts the amount of grant
funds likely to be drawn by the end of
the fiscal year from the date of the
latest payment made to the grantee.
The Federal Aid Washington Office
now uses FAIMS for the various
grants it administers. An improvement
in the ability to capture proposal
evaluation and ranking notes along
with the objective/benefits notes in
FAIMS helps facilitate interactive
review of competitive grant proposals
between the Regions and the
Washington Office.
Efforts are now underway to provide
our state clients access to FAIMS data
and reports through the Internet,
beginning a process that eventually
could lead to electronic grant
processing.
Federal Aid
Information
Systems
September 2001 5
National
Survey of
Fishing,
Hunting, and
Wildlife
Associated
Recreation
The 2001 Survey is the 10th sponsored
by the Service since 1955. It is
conducted every 5 years at the request
of the state fish and wildlife agencies
and has become one of the Nation’s
most important sources of information
on wildlife-related recreation
participation and expenditures.
The FHWAR Survey grants-in-aid
subcommittee of the IAFWA
recommended in March 1999, that the
Service conduct the next survey in
200l. The subcommittee recommended
a survey comparable to the 1991 and
1996 surveys to maintain trend
information; an increase in sample
sizes to recapture some state-level
data lost when samples were reduced
to cut costs in 1996; and the Bureau of
Census (Census) to conduct the
Survey. The recommended funding
level was $12.5 million for data
collection. Due to funding constraints,
the Service could budget only $10.2
million. Although this means that
sample sizes cannot be increased, the
survey estimates will be comparable to
the 1996 survey.
The Service signed an agreement in
June 1999, with Census to conduct the
2001 Survey. The Service staff met
with state technical committee
members and non-governmental
organizations to determine survey
content. Input also was obtained from
Federal agencies, researchers, and
other major survey users. September
18, 2000, the Office of Management
and Budget approved the Service’s
request to conduct the 2001 Survey.
Census completed data collection for
the survey screen and first detailed
interview wave from April 1 through
May 31, 2001. Information is collected
through computer-assisted interviews,
which are conducted primarily by
telephone, with in-person interviews
conducted when necessary. Census
completed screening interviews of
over 52,000 households. Household
interviews were conducted to identify
samples of 30,000 sportsmen (anglers
and hunters) and 15,000 wildlife
watchers (wildlife feeders, observers,
and photographers) for the detailed
interview phase of the survey. Census
asked individual respondents about
their 2001 activities and expenditures
in three detailed interview waves
conducted in May. Interviews will be
repeated in September 2001, and
January 2002.
Future Milestones:
■ September- October 2001, Census
will conduct the second detailed
interview wave.
■ January- March 2002, the third
detailed interview wave will be
conducted. Census will complete
data collection in March 2002.
■ July 2002, we will begin publishing
preliminary estimates on
participation and expenditures for
fishing, hunting, and wildlife-associated
recreation.
■ November 2002, the final National
Report will be published.
■ December 2002, we will begin
publishing the state reports.
■ Survey products will include 2
preliminary reports, a final national
and 50 state reports, technical
reports, a CD-ROM, and a quick
facts brochure. Reports will be
accessible on the Internet.
1996 FHWAR Survey
Information on the 1996 FHWAR
Survey reports is available on the
Service’s Home Page at the following
url: http://far9.fws.gov.surveys.
surveys.html
6 September 2001
As required by the Act, a Report to
Congress was prepared and
forwarded to Congress in late August
2001. After review by Congress this
report will appear on the Federal Aid
Home Page (http://fa.r9.fws.gov/). This
report details actions taken by the
Division to implement the Wildlife and
Sport Fish Restoration Programs
Improvement Act of 2000.
The Improvement Act reduces the
funding available for Program
administration, and Federal Aid will
reduce staffing and implement other
cuts to comply with these limits. To
stay within budgetary limits, Federal
Aid will reduce staff from145 FTEs in
Fiscal Year 2000 to 104.5 FTEs in
Fiscal Year 2003. Cost savings
resulting from administrative
reductions will be apportioned to the
states via the normal allocation
formula. To date Federal Aid has
apportioned $5.5 million of
administrative savings to the states.
Wildlife and
Sport Fish
Restoration
Programs
Improvement
Act of 2000
USFWS
September 2001 7
Multistate
Conservation
Grant
Program
The Multistate Conservation Grant
Program replaced the Federal Aid
administrative grants in Fiscal Year
2001. Furthering the partnership
between the Service and the states,
Congress stipulated that the IAFWA
would collect, consider, and
recommend grant proposals for
funding under this program. The
grant program is intended to fund
grants meeting national conservation
needs as defined by the IAFWA and
benefitting a majority of the states in
the United States, Service Region or
IAFWA Region.
Using pre-established national
conservation needs criteria, the
IAFWA recommended 14 grants
for funding during Fiscal
Year 2001. With
concurrence from the
Service Director,
Federal Aid funded all 14 grants,
totaling $5,635,835, by May 7, 2001.
The Division’s support for the program
focuses on grants administration,
monitoring and communications. In
addition, the Division is developing a
policy and procedures manual for the
Multistate Conservation Grant
Program, which is to be finished by
November 3, 2001. Lastly, the Division
is on call to provide technical advice to
the IAFWA as the Fiscal Year 2002
Multistate Conservation Grant
proposals are evaluated. The IAFWA’s
priority list of recommended project
proposals is due to the Service by
October 1, 2001.
Both, the Management Assistance
Team and the Fish and Wildlife
Reference Service which were
previously funded with Federal Aid
administrative dollars, are now funded
competitively under the Multistate
Conservation Grant Program, and
managed by or through the IAFWA.
USFWS
8 September 2001
Complete list of Multistate Conservation Grants Program Projects Funded for Fiscal Year 2001
Recipient Project Title Federal Award
KRA Corporation Operate the Fish and Wildlife Reference Service $259, 482
Silver Spring, MD
National Shooting Sports Foundation Step Outside: recruiting new audiences to shooting $179,900
Newton, CT sports, archery, hunting and fishing through one-on-one
invitations and focused outreach activities
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service National Survey of Fishing, Hunting and Wildlife- $2,790,696
Arlington, VA Associated Recreation
University of Wisconsin- Assisting States in Reaching Underrepresented Groups, $279,460
Stevens Point Specifically Ethnic Minorities and Women with Disabilities,
Stevens Point, WI through the Becoming an Outdoors-Woman Program
Responsive Management Factors Related to Hunting and Fishing Initiation, $336,720
Harrisonburg, VA Participation, and Retention Among the Nation’s Youth
Center for Wildlife Law Wildlife Law News Quarterly Publication $10,000
Albuquerque, NM
IAFWA Workshops on Integrated Migratory Bird Management $298,350
Washington, DC
Future Fisherman Foundation Strengthen and Expand the Nation’s “Hooked on Fishing - $150,125
Alexandria, VA Not on Drugs” Program
Council for Environmental Education Science and Civics: Sustaining Wildlife Involving High $54,716
Houston, TX School Students in Addressing Wildlife Needs
IAFWA The Analytical Support of Pivotal Efficacy Trials for $36,689
Washington, DC Florfenicol Use in Public Fisheries
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service The Collection of Pivotal Field Efficacy Data to $216,775
Bozeman, MT Support a New Animal Drug Approval for the Use of Florfenicol
(Aquaflor™) to Control Mortality Caused by Bacterial
Pathogens in Cultured Fish
IAFWA Automated Wildlife Data Systems Project Coordination $193,050
Washington, DC
IAFWA Outreach Project––Improving National Wildlife Capture Programs $327,376
Washington, DC & Implementing Best Management Practices
IAFWA Management Assistance Team for State Fish and Wildlife Agencies $502,496
Washington, DC
September 2001 9
National
Coastal
Wetlands
Conservation
Grant
Program
The Director of the Service
administers the National Coastal
Wetlands Conservation Grant
Program. All coastal states (except
Louisiana) and the trust territories are
eligible to submit project proposals to
the appropriate Service Regional
Office annually. The Division of
Federal Aid and the Division of Fish
and Wildlife Management Assistance
and Habitat Restoration conduct a
cross-program review of project
proposals. Finally, the Director selects
and awards the successful grants.
Through the Coastal Wetlands
Conservation Grant Program, the
Service provides up to $15 million
annually. Results of the last four years
are as follows:
A total of 25 coastal states and one
territory received funding under this
program between 1992 and 2001, for a
total of 181 projects. Project
participants in this program are
generally state and territorial
agencies, but have included county and
municipal governments and non-government
organizations. For the
$90 million granted since 1992,
approximately one hundred and five
thousand acres have or will be
protected and/or restored.
FY # of Projects Awarded Acres
1998 20 $9.8M 12,680
1999 18 $9.8M 24,900
2000 25 $11.8M 5,500
2001 22 $15M 11,350
USFWS
10 September 2001
The Aquatic Resource Education
Program helps people understand,
enjoy and conserve the aquatic natural
resources of the nation. States have
the option of using up to 15% of their
annual Sport Fish Restoration
apportionment for aquatic resource
education programs and outreach and
communications projects. Although
funding for aquatic education is
optional, 45 states, the District of
Columbia and all of the territories
choose to spend some of their dollars
on aquatic education. In Fiscal Year
2000, we obligated more than $13.7
million of Sport Fish Restoration
funds on these programs.
The states tailor their programs to
their specific aquatic resources and
citizen needs. The programs provide a
hands-on, field-oriented approach to
education and strive to offer
educational opportunities to a variety
of audiences across the state. Using
such methods as workshops,
producing curriculum and other
educational materials, volunteer-led
clinics, and summer programs, states
reach teachers, school students (K-12
and college), youth groups enrolled in
Aquatic
Resource
Education
Program
recreation programs, urban youth and
families, landowners, and visitors to
state hatcheries, aquariums and
education centers. Program topics
vary but may cover freshwater, marine
and estuarine ecology, watersheds,
functions and values of wetlands,
fisheries biology and management, and
fishing skills, safety and ethics.
Aquatic resource education programs
give non-anglers, especially youth, the
skills and opportunities to make
fishing a lifetime pursuit. Some
programs work to develop stewardship
behavior through environmental issue
investigation and critical thinking
skills training as well as citizen action
projects.
To stretch dollars and expertise, states
forge partnerships, with colleges and
universities, other state resource and
education agencies, local recreation
departments, tackle manufacturers
and retailers, community groups, city
youth organizations, summer camps,
and local and national conservation
organizations. In recent years, many
states have tied their programs to
new state education and student
performance standards, thus
increasing their use in schools. States
also use evaluation research to
strengthen all aspects of their aquatic
education programs.
States often use the value of time
donated by skilled volunteers as part
or all of their required 25% state
matching funds. This ���in-kind” match
may come from teachers who attend
agency weekend workshops, trained
volunteers who join the program and
teach fishing skills and basic fish
biology to youth, and other interested
citizens who donate time and expertise
to help with programs. Many local
communities and businesses also
donate materials and equipment,
meeting space, and transportation,
all of which contribute to support the
statewide education programs.
USFWS
September 2001 11
Hunter
Education
Section 10
Section 10 of the Wildlife and Sport
Fish Restoration Programs
Improvement Act of 2000 allocated
$7.5 million for Fiscal Year 2001 for
enhancement of hunter education
programs. Apportionment and
expenditure data, and accomplishment
reports are available through FAIMS
or on the Federal Aid Home Page.
The following is the interim policy of
the Service with regard to these funds:
1. The Service will apportion Section
10 funds using the same formula as
other Wildlife Restoration Hunter
Education funds [Section 4(c)].
2. Until a state has fully obligated its
Section 4(c) apportionment, it can
only use its Section 10
apportionment to enhance hunter
education related programs as
described in 3a and 3b.
3a.The purposes described in Section
10(A) are: (i) the enhancement of
hunter education programs, hunter
and sporting firearm safety
programs, and hunter development
programs; (ii) the enhancement of
interstate coordination and
development of hunter education
and shooting range programs; (iii)
the enhancement of bow hunter and
archery education, safety, and
development programs; and (iv) the
enhancement of construction or
development of firearm shooting
ranges and archery ranges, and the
updating of safety features of
firearm shooting ranges and
archery ranges.
3b.Section 10 monies are intended to
supplement, not replace, Section
4(c) funds, thereby enhancing
hunter education. The
Congressional Record states these
funds can be used to “hire
additional staff for hunter education
programs; provide additional
materials for hunter education
courses; enhance and modernize
materials as needed; investigate
new technologies and delivery
methods; develop and evaluate
home study courses; create
advanced hunter education courses;
perform programmatic evaluations
and monitoring of hunter education
classes; improve and enhance
training for hunter education
instructors.” All of these items are
considered to enhance the Hunter
Education Program.
4. After a state obligates its current
year Section 4(c) apportionment for
hunter education purposes, a state
may obligate its Section 10 funds
for any eligible wildlife restoration
or hunter education projects. Prior
to obligating the full Section 4(c)
apportionment a state may only
obligate Section 10 funds for hunter
education purposes.
5. Section 10 funds are 1-year funds
and any funds not obligated in the
current year’s apportionment are
reapportioned to those states that
have fully obligated their Section
4(c) funds on hunter education
projects. The funds are
reapportioned in the following year
under Section 3(a) of the Wildlife
Restoration Act as additional
regular P-R funds.
6. The Service will track obligations
and expenditures of Section 10
funds through a dedicated
subactivity code in the Service’s
accounting systems.
This policy is consistent with what
Congress intended when they passed
the Improvement Act. It provides
States with flexibility, while enhancing
hunting and shooting activities and
projects.
The Division provided additional
support for the programs objectives by
developing a baseline of past Hunter
Education Program spending for each
state as another measure of enhanced
spending by the states. This baseline
measure may be used in conjunction
with other measures of Hunter
Education Program enhancement.
Hunter Education (HE) Funds and Decision Tree
12 September 2001
Wildlife
Restoration (WR)
Account
Sec 4(c) 2-year $
Sec 10 1-year $
Is current FY Sec 4(c) $ fully
obligated for HE projects?
Section 10 $ may be used for
HE enhancement only
Regular Wildlife
Restoration Account
Apportionment to
States, 2-year $
Special Wildlife Restoration Account
for unobligated Sec 10 $ .
Reapportionment to States that obligated
all of their Sec 4(c) $ for HE in the
previous year, 2-year $
Are all Sec 10 $ obligated? Are all Sec 10 $ obligated?
Section 10 $ may be used for
HE or WR projects
Complete Complete
List of States that fully
obligated current FY Sec 4(c)
$ for HE projects
No
Yes No Yes No
Yes
September 2001 13
All the information and tables
previously found in the appendices in
earlier Program Updates are now on
the Federal Aid Home Page where
they are maintained at:
http://fa.r9.fws.gov/
Appendices
Photodisc
U.S. Department of the Interior
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Division of Federal Aid
http://www.fws.gov
September 2001

Click tabs to swap between content that is broken into logical sections.

September 2001
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Sport Fish and Wildlife
Restoration
Program Update September 2001
cover photo: Photodisc
i
Table of
Contents
September 2001
Assistant Director Comments ii
Staff Directory, Federal Aid, Washington Office iv
Federal Aid Grant Programs - Overview 1
Focus on Specific Programs and Activities 3
DCAA Audit 3
Federal Aid Information Systems 4
National Survey of Fishing, Hunting, and Wildlife Associated Recreation 5
Wildlife and Sport Fish Restoration Programs Improvement Act of 2000 6
Multistate Conservation Grant Program 7
National Coastal Wetlands Conservation Grant Program 9
Aquatic Resource Education Program 10
Hunter Education Section 10 11
Appendices 13
Photodisc
ii September 2001
Assistant
Director
Comments
This was an extremely busy year for
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s
(Service) Federal Aid employees. They
worked hard to bring the programs
they administer into full compliance
with the Wildlife and Sport Fish
Restoration Programs Improvement
Act of 2000. They were simultaneously
dealing with significant issues
concerning the future conduct of the
Federal Aid Audit Program.
A report detailing our efforts to
institute measures required in the
Improvement Act was submitted to
Congress and will be available to the
public on the Service’s Federal Aid
web site (www.fs.r9.fws.gov). Report
highlights include: start-up of the $6
million Multistate Conservation Grant
Program with 14 projects funded;
establishment of procedures to
administer the new Firearm and Bow
Hunter Education Safety Program
Grants to fund hunter education and
shooting range construction;
implementation of procedures to meet
the 12 allowable categories of
administrative expenses required by
the Improvement Act; reduction of
administrative budgets for the
programs from $32 million in Fiscal
Year 2000 to $18 million in Fiscal Year
2001; and apportionment of $5.5
million in administrative cost savings
to the states.
To meet the administrative cost
reductions required by the
Improvement Act, the Service will
reduce the number of Federal Aid
employees nationwide from 147 in
Fiscal Year 2000 to 104 in Fiscal Year
2003. This reduced staffing level
presents one of the larger challenges
we face as we move forward.
The Improvement Act eliminated
funding for the Fish and Wildlife
Reference Service and the
Management Assistance Team, two
Federal Aid activities that were
popular with the states. Fortunately,
with help from the International
Association of Fish and Wildlife
Agencies (IAFWA), we were able to
use the Multistate Conservation Grant
Program to enable these services to
continue. We are also using Multistate
Conservation Grant funding for the
first time to pay for the 2001 National
Survey of Fishing, Hunting, and
Wildlife Associated Recreation. This
will be the 10th survey since 1955 and
has become the Nation’s most
important source of information on
wildlife-related recreation,
participation, and economic benefits.
You can expect publication of the
National report by November, 2002,
with the state reports to follow in
December.
Two important new programs,
the Boating Infrastructure Grant
(BIG) Program and the Wildlife
Conservation Restoration Program
(WCRP) also got underway this year.
The Service announced the availability
of $16 million in BIG Program grants
for this fiscal year and announced the
first cycle of projects to be funded.
Working in close cooperation with the
IAFWA and several states, we
launched the $50 million WCRP. As
part of this effort, I am pleased to
report we have approved WCRP
comprehensive plans for all 50 states
and the 6 territories and that many
states already have initiated projects.
Finally, following a thorough review of
the Defense Audit Contract Agency
(DCAA) state audits, the Service
decided to terminate its Memorandum
of Understanding with DCAA. We are
working closely with DCAA, our Office
of Inspector General, and other
Interior Department offices to ensure
that this termination will not interfere
unduly in the audit process. We will
work closely with the states to
complete open audits in a timely
manner and ensure that states have
full involvement in completing the
audit process.
September 2001 iii
The coming years will be challenging
ones for the Service’s Federal Aid
programs. With reduced staff levels
we will have to adapt to Congressional
mandates, implement new grant
programs, administer existing grant
programs, and maintain a strong
relationship with our state partners.
Nonetheless, based on what we have
accomplished in 2001, I am confident
that our well trained, dedicated
professional staff is up to the
challenge. While we move forward to
improve management of what is
arguably the Nation’s most effective
conservation program, I predict we
will see a notable improvement in the
delivery of services to you, our
customers.
USFWS
iv September 2001
Kris E. LaMontagne
Division Chief
* Larry Bandolin
Deputy Division Chief - Operations
Jimmye Kane
Secretary
Branch of Budget and
Administration
Tom Jeffrey
Branch Chief - Budget
Development and Execution -
Program Management - Special
Projects
Mary Jones
Administrative Officer
Branch of FAIMS and ADP Support
Bill Conlin
Branch Chief - Information Resources
and ADP Management - ADP Support
- Federal Aid Information
Management System (FAIMS)
Jeffrey Graves
Server Support - Web Site Support
David Washington
ADP Systems Support - ADP
Acquisition Support
Branch of Grants Operations and
Policy
Gary Reinitz
Branch Chief - Policy - National Issue
Management
Jack Hicks
Regulation - FWS Manual -
Hunter/Aquatic Education
* Michael Vanderford
CVA - BIG - National Coastal
Wetlands Conservation Grants-
Wildlife Restoration Program -
Partnerships for Wildlife Program
* Tim Hess
WCRP - Sport Fish Restoration
Program
* Chris McKay
(Internal Partner with RBFF)
Multistate Conservation Grant
Program
Branch of Audits and Cash
Management
Lanny Moore
Branch Chief - Audits - Cash
Management
* Ord Bargerstock
Systems Accountant - Regions 4 & 5 -
Audit Resolution
* Pat McHugh
Systems Accountant - Regions 3, 6, &
7 - Audit Program Oversight
* Kate Gilliam
Systems Accountant - Regions 1 & 2 -
Lessons Learned - Future Audit Plans
Branch of Surveys
Sylvia Cabrera
Branch Chief - National Survey of
Fishing Hunting and Wildlife
Associated Recreation
Richard Aiken
Economist - National Survey
Genevieve Pullis
Economist - National Survey
Branch of Training
Steve Leggans
Branch Chief
Blake Weirich
Assistant Training Coordinator
Left the WO
Bill Gruber
Accountant, Retired
Steve Farrell
transferred to WO Refuges
Pete Peterson
transferred to DOI
Michelle Morman
transferred to WO Refuges
Staff Directory
Federal Aid
Washington
Office
* New in this position.
Division of Federal Aid
Washington Office
4401 N. Fairfax Drice
Suite 140
Arlington, VA 22203
Main: 703/358 2156
Fax: 703/358 1837
Internet home page:
http://fa.r9.fws.gov
September 2001 1
Federal Aid
Grant Programs
Overview The goal of the Federal Aid Program
is to strengthen the ability of state and
territorial fish and wildlife agencies to
meet effectively the consumptive and
non-consumptive needs of the public
for fish and wildlife resources. The
Federal Aid Program is responsible
for administering the following
programs:
■ Wildlife Restoration
■ Sport Fish Restoration
■ Clean Vessel Pumpout
■ Boating Infrastructure Grant
■ National Coastal Wetlands
Conservation Grant
■ Partnerships for Wildlife Grant
■ Wildlife Conservation and
Restoration
■ Multistate Conservation Grant
The Federal Aid in Wildlife
Restoration Act was approved by
Congress on September 2, 1937, and
began functioning on July 1, 1938. The
purpose of this Act is to provide
funding for the selection, restoration,
rehabilitation and improvement of
wildlife habitat, wildlife management
research and the distribution of
information produced by the projects.
Congress amended the Act October
23, 1970, to include funding for hunter
training programs and the
development, operation and
maintenance of public target ranges.
Funds are derived from an 11 percent
Federal excise tax on sporting arms,
ammunition, and archery equipment,
and a 10 percent tax on handguns.
Additional funds are also collected
from a 12.4 percent tax on archery
equipment. These funds are
apportioned each year to the states
and territories (except Puerto Rico) by
the Department of the Interior on the
basis of formulas set forth in the Act.
The Federal Aid in Sport Fish
Restoration Act, commonly referred to
as the Dingell-Johnson Act was passed
on August 9, 1950. It was modeled
after the Federal Aid in Wildlife
Restoration Act to create a parallel
program for fish management,
conservation, and restoration. The
Program is funded by a 10 percent
Federal excise tax on fishing rods,
reels, creels, lures, flies and artificial
baits and a 3 percent tax on electronic
fishing motors and sonar fish finders.
These funds are also apportioned each
year to the states and territories
(except Puerto Rico) by the
Department of the Interior on the
basis of a formula set forth in the Act.
The Clean Vessel Act was passed in
1992 to help reduce pollution from
vessel sewage discharges. The Act
established a Federal grant program
to the states to be administered by the
Service and funded by the Sport Fish
Restoration Account of the Aquatic
Resource’s Trust Fund. Federal funds
can cover up to 75 percent of all
approved project costs with the
remaining funds provided by the
states or marinas. Grants are available
to the states on a competitive basis for
the construction and/or renovation,
operation, and maintenance of
pumpout and portable toilet dump
stations. After states submit grant
proposals to the Service for review, the
Service’s Division of Federal Aid then
convenes a panel including
representatives from the Divisions’
Washington Office, the National
Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration, the Environmental
Protection Agency, and the U.S. Coast
Guard to rank proposals. Awards are
made shortly afterward.
The Boating Infrastructure Grant
(BIG) Program provides $32 million
over four years (2000- 2003) for grants
to the states and territories, local
governments and private marinas. The
purpose of the grants is to encourage
states, in cooperation with local and
private interests, to install, renovate
and maintain tie-up facilities for
nontrailerable recreational boats.
2 September 2001
The Sport Fishing and Boating
Partnership Council annually
recommends grants for funding to the
Service.
The Coastal Wetlands Planning,
Protection and Restoration Act is
funded by 18 percent of the Sport Fish
Restoration Account or 100 percent of
the excise tax on small engine fuel
(whichever is greater). The program
provides 15 percent of the funds (not
to exceed $15 million) for the National
Coastal Wetlands Conservation Grant
Program. The Service provides
Coastal Wetlands Grants to states
and territories for coastal wetlands
acquisition, restoration and
enhancement. Congress reauthorized
The Coastal Wetlands Planning,
Protection and Restoration Act in
November, 2000, through Fiscal Year
2009.
The purpose of the Partnerships for
Wildlife Grant Program is to establish
partnerships among the Service,
states and territories, non-government
organizations and individuals. The
program is to support wildlife
conservation and appreciation
projects, encourage states and
territories to more fully use
public/private partnerships to carry
out wildlife conservation and
appreciation projects, and encourage
private donations and partnerships to
carry out wildlife conservation and
appreciation projects. The
Partnerships for Wildlife Grant
Program is designed to have 1/3
contributions each for a given project
from the Service, the sponsor state,
and a private party. For Fiscal Year
2001, $1,052,158 was made available to
grantees under this program.
The Wildlife Conservation and
Restoration Program was authorized
by Congress in 2000, and implemented
in Fiscal Year 2001. State and
territorial fish and wildlife agencies
are encouraged to participate with the
Federal Government, other state
agencies, wildlife conservation
organizations and outdoor recreation
and conservation interests through
cooperative planning and
implementation of the Wildlife
Conservation and Restoration
Program. Wildlife conservation,
wildlife conservation education, and
wildlife-associated recreation activities
are all eligible for funding. Public input
and participation is actively sought by
the states in conducting this program.
The program was funded with $50
million for Fiscal Year 2001 with the
funds being apportioned to the states
and territories by formula.
The new Multistate Conservation
Grant Program provides up to $6
million annually to projects that
benefit resources in unique and
innovative ways. The projects
recommended for funding to the
Secretary of Interior by the IAFWA
must benefit 26 states, a majority of
states in a Service Region, or a
regional association of state fish and
wildlife agencies. There were 14 grants
awarded in Fiscal Year 2001.
The above programs are designed to
help conserve, develop, and enhance
the Nation’s fish and wildlife
resources, and to protect their habitats
for the continuing benefit of the
American people.
September 2001 3
Focus on
Specific
Programs and
Activities
DCAA Audit The Service’s Division of Federal Aid
provided notice to the Defense
Contracting Audit Agency (DCAA) that
it is terminating the Memorandum of
Understanding under which DCAA
conducts state audits for Federal Aid.
The termination of the MOU with
DCAA while audits are still underway
raised some understandable questions
regarding the completion of current
and future audits. The disengagement
process is still in negotiation and some
details remain to be worked out. We are
working closely with DCAA, our Office
of Inspector General and others to
assure a smooth transition. We are
confident all issues will be resolved
satisfactorily and equitably.
Our clear intent is to give the states the
best service we can. We will continue to
work closely with Regional Offices and
the states to complete open audits in a
timely fashion. States will continue to
have the same opportunities for input
into completing the audit process.
Teams of auditors from Federal Aid
Washington and Regional Offices along
with state representatives and staff
from several Department of Interior
Offices will participate in completing
the current audit process.
In addition to ongoing efforts to
complete open audits, we are
undertaking actions to improve the
next cycle of audits. To this end, we are
conducting a “lessons learned analysis”
based on data gleaned from audit
findings and additional data gathered
from Regional Offices, and eventually,
the states. From the “lessons learned
analysis” we will have the information
necessary to write a revised audit
scope of work and provide a more
consistent and standardized application
of the audit program. The addition of
two auditors in the Washington Office
will enable the Service to provide more
oversight during the next state audit
process. The Washington auditors will
participate in the entrance conference,
field work, review of working papers,
and provide input to the content of
draft reports. With your assistance we
believe we can improve the process for
conducting future audits.
Working through our Regional Offices,
we will keep our state partners
informed of developments regarding
the evolution of the audit process.
Photodisc
4 September 2001
The FAIMS team added two modules
to FAIMS. The Lands Component
allows the user to record greater detail
in grant accomplishment records
including information about the type of
interest acquired. Regional files of
scanned documents (maps and legal
descriptions) associated with the
acquisition are but two examples of
records that can be added. The Alerts
Component allows individual
notification of Federal Aid staff about a
variety of processing actions needed.
These range from performance
reports received for which
accomplishment records have yet to be
created, to the pending expiration of
Grant Agreements or Applications for
Federal Assistance. These alerts
provide an immediate link to the
appropriate records facilitating timely
resolution of each potential issue.
Another time saving feature of FAIMS
that improves Regional Office
efficiency is the integration of a letter
generation capability with
WordPerfect. This allows each
Regional Office to format letters
informing grantees about the outcome
of proposal and grant reviews with
reference to grant records supporting
the approval decision.
FAIMS was modified to accept entries
for eight new grant programs. The
programs are; Habitat Conservation
Plan (HCP) Land Acquisition,
Candidate Conservation Agreement,
HCP Planning Grants, Safe Harbor,
Species Recovery Land Acquisition,
HCP Land Acquisition Grants to
States (all endangered species
related), Boating Infrastructure Grant,
Section 10 Hunter Education, and
Wildlife Conservation and Restoration.
Instructions about how to set up new
grant programs at both the regional
and national level were added to the
on-line help system. The
apportionment calculations, previously
a stand alone program, was added to
FAIMS and the sub-program
accounting codes long used by Federal
Aid were aligned to match those codes
used by the Service’s Federal
Financial System (FFS), thus
improving system synchronization.
Finally, two new reports were created.
A state report that summarizes
awarded grants by Region, state,
program, and Fiscal Year replaces the
former Federal Aid Annual Report
that often was long delayed in
production. A Federal Aid Accrual
Report predicts the amount of grant
funds likely to be drawn by the end of
the fiscal year from the date of the
latest payment made to the grantee.
The Federal Aid Washington Office
now uses FAIMS for the various
grants it administers. An improvement
in the ability to capture proposal
evaluation and ranking notes along
with the objective/benefits notes in
FAIMS helps facilitate interactive
review of competitive grant proposals
between the Regions and the
Washington Office.
Efforts are now underway to provide
our state clients access to FAIMS data
and reports through the Internet,
beginning a process that eventually
could lead to electronic grant
processing.
Federal Aid
Information
Systems
September 2001 5
National
Survey of
Fishing,
Hunting, and
Wildlife
Associated
Recreation
The 2001 Survey is the 10th sponsored
by the Service since 1955. It is
conducted every 5 years at the request
of the state fish and wildlife agencies
and has become one of the Nation’s
most important sources of information
on wildlife-related recreation
participation and expenditures.
The FHWAR Survey grants-in-aid
subcommittee of the IAFWA
recommended in March 1999, that the
Service conduct the next survey in
200l. The subcommittee recommended
a survey comparable to the 1991 and
1996 surveys to maintain trend
information; an increase in sample
sizes to recapture some state-level
data lost when samples were reduced
to cut costs in 1996; and the Bureau of
Census (Census) to conduct the
Survey. The recommended funding
level was $12.5 million for data
collection. Due to funding constraints,
the Service could budget only $10.2
million. Although this means that
sample sizes cannot be increased, the
survey estimates will be comparable to
the 1996 survey.
The Service signed an agreement in
June 1999, with Census to conduct the
2001 Survey. The Service staff met
with state technical committee
members and non-governmental
organizations to determine survey
content. Input also was obtained from
Federal agencies, researchers, and
other major survey users. September
18, 2000, the Office of Management
and Budget approved the Service’s
request to conduct the 2001 Survey.
Census completed data collection for
the survey screen and first detailed
interview wave from April 1 through
May 31, 2001. Information is collected
through computer-assisted interviews,
which are conducted primarily by
telephone, with in-person interviews
conducted when necessary. Census
completed screening interviews of
over 52,000 households. Household
interviews were conducted to identify
samples of 30,000 sportsmen (anglers
and hunters) and 15,000 wildlife
watchers (wildlife feeders, observers,
and photographers) for the detailed
interview phase of the survey. Census
asked individual respondents about
their 2001 activities and expenditures
in three detailed interview waves
conducted in May. Interviews will be
repeated in September 2001, and
January 2002.
Future Milestones:
■ September- October 2001, Census
will conduct the second detailed
interview wave.
■ January- March 2002, the third
detailed interview wave will be
conducted. Census will complete
data collection in March 2002.
■ July 2002, we will begin publishing
preliminary estimates on
participation and expenditures for
fishing, hunting, and wildlife-associated
recreation.
■ November 2002, the final National
Report will be published.
■ December 2002, we will begin
publishing the state reports.
■ Survey products will include 2
preliminary reports, a final national
and 50 state reports, technical
reports, a CD-ROM, and a quick
facts brochure. Reports will be
accessible on the Internet.
1996 FHWAR Survey
Information on the 1996 FHWAR
Survey reports is available on the
Service’s Home Page at the following
url: http://far9.fws.gov.surveys.
surveys.html
6 September 2001
As required by the Act, a Report to
Congress was prepared and
forwarded to Congress in late August
2001. After review by Congress this
report will appear on the Federal Aid
Home Page (http://fa.r9.fws.gov/). This
report details actions taken by the
Division to implement the Wildlife and
Sport Fish Restoration Programs
Improvement Act of 2000.
The Improvement Act reduces the
funding available for Program
administration, and Federal Aid will
reduce staffing and implement other
cuts to comply with these limits. To
stay within budgetary limits, Federal
Aid will reduce staff from145 FTEs in
Fiscal Year 2000 to 104.5 FTEs in
Fiscal Year 2003. Cost savings
resulting from administrative
reductions will be apportioned to the
states via the normal allocation
formula. To date Federal Aid has
apportioned $5.5 million of
administrative savings to the states.
Wildlife and
Sport Fish
Restoration
Programs
Improvement
Act of 2000
USFWS
September 2001 7
Multistate
Conservation
Grant
Program
The Multistate Conservation Grant
Program replaced the Federal Aid
administrative grants in Fiscal Year
2001. Furthering the partnership
between the Service and the states,
Congress stipulated that the IAFWA
would collect, consider, and
recommend grant proposals for
funding under this program. The
grant program is intended to fund
grants meeting national conservation
needs as defined by the IAFWA and
benefitting a majority of the states in
the United States, Service Region or
IAFWA Region.
Using pre-established national
conservation needs criteria, the
IAFWA recommended 14 grants
for funding during Fiscal
Year 2001. With
concurrence from the
Service Director,
Federal Aid funded all 14 grants,
totaling $5,635,835, by May 7, 2001.
The Division’s support for the program
focuses on grants administration,
monitoring and communications. In
addition, the Division is developing a
policy and procedures manual for the
Multistate Conservation Grant
Program, which is to be finished by
November 3, 2001. Lastly, the Division
is on call to provide technical advice to
the IAFWA as the Fiscal Year 2002
Multistate Conservation Grant
proposals are evaluated. The IAFWA’s
priority list of recommended project
proposals is due to the Service by
October 1, 2001.
Both, the Management Assistance
Team and the Fish and Wildlife
Reference Service which were
previously funded with Federal Aid
administrative dollars, are now funded
competitively under the Multistate
Conservation Grant Program, and
managed by or through the IAFWA.
USFWS
8 September 2001
Complete list of Multistate Conservation Grants Program Projects Funded for Fiscal Year 2001
Recipient Project Title Federal Award
KRA Corporation Operate the Fish and Wildlife Reference Service $259, 482
Silver Spring, MD
National Shooting Sports Foundation Step Outside: recruiting new audiences to shooting $179,900
Newton, CT sports, archery, hunting and fishing through one-on-one
invitations and focused outreach activities
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service National Survey of Fishing, Hunting and Wildlife- $2,790,696
Arlington, VA Associated Recreation
University of Wisconsin- Assisting States in Reaching Underrepresented Groups, $279,460
Stevens Point Specifically Ethnic Minorities and Women with Disabilities,
Stevens Point, WI through the Becoming an Outdoors-Woman Program
Responsive Management Factors Related to Hunting and Fishing Initiation, $336,720
Harrisonburg, VA Participation, and Retention Among the Nation’s Youth
Center for Wildlife Law Wildlife Law News Quarterly Publication $10,000
Albuquerque, NM
IAFWA Workshops on Integrated Migratory Bird Management $298,350
Washington, DC
Future Fisherman Foundation Strengthen and Expand the Nation’s “Hooked on Fishing - $150,125
Alexandria, VA Not on Drugs” Program
Council for Environmental Education Science and Civics: Sustaining Wildlife Involving High $54,716
Houston, TX School Students in Addressing Wildlife Needs
IAFWA The Analytical Support of Pivotal Efficacy Trials for $36,689
Washington, DC Florfenicol Use in Public Fisheries
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service The Collection of Pivotal Field Efficacy Data to $216,775
Bozeman, MT Support a New Animal Drug Approval for the Use of Florfenicol
(Aquaflor™) to Control Mortality Caused by Bacterial
Pathogens in Cultured Fish
IAFWA Automated Wildlife Data Systems Project Coordination $193,050
Washington, DC
IAFWA Outreach Project––Improving National Wildlife Capture Programs $327,376
Washington, DC & Implementing Best Management Practices
IAFWA Management Assistance Team for State Fish and Wildlife Agencies $502,496
Washington, DC
September 2001 9
National
Coastal
Wetlands
Conservation
Grant
Program
The Director of the Service
administers the National Coastal
Wetlands Conservation Grant
Program. All coastal states (except
Louisiana) and the trust territories are
eligible to submit project proposals to
the appropriate Service Regional
Office annually. The Division of
Federal Aid and the Division of Fish
and Wildlife Management Assistance
and Habitat Restoration conduct a
cross-program review of project
proposals. Finally, the Director selects
and awards the successful grants.
Through the Coastal Wetlands
Conservation Grant Program, the
Service provides up to $15 million
annually. Results of the last four years
are as follows:
A total of 25 coastal states and one
territory received funding under this
program between 1992 and 2001, for a
total of 181 projects. Project
participants in this program are
generally state and territorial
agencies, but have included county and
municipal governments and non-government
organizations. For the
$90 million granted since 1992,
approximately one hundred and five
thousand acres have or will be
protected and/or restored.
FY # of Projects Awarded Acres
1998 20 $9.8M 12,680
1999 18 $9.8M 24,900
2000 25 $11.8M 5,500
2001 22 $15M 11,350
USFWS
10 September 2001
The Aquatic Resource Education
Program helps people understand,
enjoy and conserve the aquatic natural
resources of the nation. States have
the option of using up to 15% of their
annual Sport Fish Restoration
apportionment for aquatic resource
education programs and outreach and
communications projects. Although
funding for aquatic education is
optional, 45 states, the District of
Columbia and all of the territories
choose to spend some of their dollars
on aquatic education. In Fiscal Year
2000, we obligated more than $13.7
million of Sport Fish Restoration
funds on these programs.
The states tailor their programs to
their specific aquatic resources and
citizen needs. The programs provide a
hands-on, field-oriented approach to
education and strive to offer
educational opportunities to a variety
of audiences across the state. Using
such methods as workshops,
producing curriculum and other
educational materials, volunteer-led
clinics, and summer programs, states
reach teachers, school students (K-12
and college), youth groups enrolled in
Aquatic
Resource
Education
Program
recreation programs, urban youth and
families, landowners, and visitors to
state hatcheries, aquariums and
education centers. Program topics
vary but may cover freshwater, marine
and estuarine ecology, watersheds,
functions and values of wetlands,
fisheries biology and management, and
fishing skills, safety and ethics.
Aquatic resource education programs
give non-anglers, especially youth, the
skills and opportunities to make
fishing a lifetime pursuit. Some
programs work to develop stewardship
behavior through environmental issue
investigation and critical thinking
skills training as well as citizen action
projects.
To stretch dollars and expertise, states
forge partnerships, with colleges and
universities, other state resource and
education agencies, local recreation
departments, tackle manufacturers
and retailers, community groups, city
youth organizations, summer camps,
and local and national conservation
organizations. In recent years, many
states have tied their programs to
new state education and student
performance standards, thus
increasing their use in schools. States
also use evaluation research to
strengthen all aspects of their aquatic
education programs.
States often use the value of time
donated by skilled volunteers as part
or all of their required 25% state
matching funds. This ���in-kind” match
may come from teachers who attend
agency weekend workshops, trained
volunteers who join the program and
teach fishing skills and basic fish
biology to youth, and other interested
citizens who donate time and expertise
to help with programs. Many local
communities and businesses also
donate materials and equipment,
meeting space, and transportation,
all of which contribute to support the
statewide education programs.
USFWS
September 2001 11
Hunter
Education
Section 10
Section 10 of the Wildlife and Sport
Fish Restoration Programs
Improvement Act of 2000 allocated
$7.5 million for Fiscal Year 2001 for
enhancement of hunter education
programs. Apportionment and
expenditure data, and accomplishment
reports are available through FAIMS
or on the Federal Aid Home Page.
The following is the interim policy of
the Service with regard to these funds:
1. The Service will apportion Section
10 funds using the same formula as
other Wildlife Restoration Hunter
Education funds [Section 4(c)].
2. Until a state has fully obligated its
Section 4(c) apportionment, it can
only use its Section 10
apportionment to enhance hunter
education related programs as
described in 3a and 3b.
3a.The purposes described in Section
10(A) are: (i) the enhancement of
hunter education programs, hunter
and sporting firearm safety
programs, and hunter development
programs; (ii) the enhancement of
interstate coordination and
development of hunter education
and shooting range programs; (iii)
the enhancement of bow hunter and
archery education, safety, and
development programs; and (iv) the
enhancement of construction or
development of firearm shooting
ranges and archery ranges, and the
updating of safety features of
firearm shooting ranges and
archery ranges.
3b.Section 10 monies are intended to
supplement, not replace, Section
4(c) funds, thereby enhancing
hunter education. The
Congressional Record states these
funds can be used to “hire
additional staff for hunter education
programs; provide additional
materials for hunter education
courses; enhance and modernize
materials as needed; investigate
new technologies and delivery
methods; develop and evaluate
home study courses; create
advanced hunter education courses;
perform programmatic evaluations
and monitoring of hunter education
classes; improve and enhance
training for hunter education
instructors.” All of these items are
considered to enhance the Hunter
Education Program.
4. After a state obligates its current
year Section 4(c) apportionment for
hunter education purposes, a state
may obligate its Section 10 funds
for any eligible wildlife restoration
or hunter education projects. Prior
to obligating the full Section 4(c)
apportionment a state may only
obligate Section 10 funds for hunter
education purposes.
5. Section 10 funds are 1-year funds
and any funds not obligated in the
current year’s apportionment are
reapportioned to those states that
have fully obligated their Section
4(c) funds on hunter education
projects. The funds are
reapportioned in the following year
under Section 3(a) of the Wildlife
Restoration Act as additional
regular P-R funds.
6. The Service will track obligations
and expenditures of Section 10
funds through a dedicated
subactivity code in the Service’s
accounting systems.
This policy is consistent with what
Congress intended when they passed
the Improvement Act. It provides
States with flexibility, while enhancing
hunting and shooting activities and
projects.
The Division provided additional
support for the programs objectives by
developing a baseline of past Hunter
Education Program spending for each
state as another measure of enhanced
spending by the states. This baseline
measure may be used in conjunction
with other measures of Hunter
Education Program enhancement.
Hunter Education (HE) Funds and Decision Tree
12 September 2001
Wildlife
Restoration (WR)
Account
Sec 4(c) 2-year $
Sec 10 1-year $
Is current FY Sec 4(c) $ fully
obligated for HE projects?
Section 10 $ may be used for
HE enhancement only
Regular Wildlife
Restoration Account
Apportionment to
States, 2-year $
Special Wildlife Restoration Account
for unobligated Sec 10 $ .
Reapportionment to States that obligated
all of their Sec 4(c) $ for HE in the
previous year, 2-year $
Are all Sec 10 $ obligated? Are all Sec 10 $ obligated?
Section 10 $ may be used for
HE or WR projects
Complete Complete
List of States that fully
obligated current FY Sec 4(c)
$ for HE projects
No
Yes No Yes No
Yes
September 2001 13
All the information and tables
previously found in the appendices in
earlier Program Updates are now on
the Federal Aid Home Page where
they are maintained at:
http://fa.r9.fws.gov/
Appendices
Photodisc
U.S. Department of the Interior
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Division of Federal Aid
http://www.fws.gov
September 2001